The lever paradox and the elevator paradox are more challenges to relativity than the twin paradox and the submarine paradox.

The lever paradox was raised by Xinwei Huang about in 2001. It has be discussed for many years in China. The conclusion is that special relativity can not explain the lever paradox, unless the introduction of the gravitation magnetic field hypothesis.

So Xinwei Huang raised the elevator paradox about in 2004. The elevator paradox has almost no discussion because even the gravitation magnetic field hypothesis can not explain it.

To solve these two paradoxes, I put forward my own theory. It can also explain the phenomenons that be explained by the special theory of relativity. But derive the same equation, it is much simpler more than the special relativity. Moreover, it has no all kinds of paradoxes.

Both seem to be explained quite adequately without having to introduce anything weird like you are doing.

Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

"Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
"All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle

searching for things can often be faster than asking. i found the paradox sites at wikipedia in under 5 seconds. it probably took you longer to post to ask where the sites were.

Burden of evidence. It's not on us to go look for supporting materials when someone else is making a claim. Whilst in this case, it seems the material was easy to find, this is very often not the case and so on average it is quicker to ask the poster to provide the information.

searching for things can often be faster than asking. i found the paradox sites at wikipedia in under 5 seconds. it probably took you longer to post to ask where the sites were.

I can't find them.

The "Elevator paradox" can be found in a wiki article by the same name. The "lever paradox" appears to be referring to the "right angle lever paradox", which is similar to another entry named the "Trouton–Noble experiment".

Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

"Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
"All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle

[/quote]The "Elevator paradox" can be found in a wiki article by the same name. The "lever paradox" appears to be referring to the "right angle lever paradox", which is similar to another entry named the "Trouton–Noble experiment".[/quote]

The "Lever paradox" is not the "right angle lever paradox".
The "Elevator paradox" is not the same name "Elevator paradox" in the past.

The "Elevator paradox" can be found in a wiki article by the same name. The "lever paradox" appears to be referring to the "right angle lever paradox", which is similar to another entry named the "Trouton–Noble experiment".[/quote]

The "Lever paradox" is not the "right angle lever paradox".
The "Elevator paradox" is not the same name "Elevator paradox" in the past.[/quote]Then please, for the second time, post what they are. I am not going to search for them. It is not my job to do your research and search for your point

Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
-Plato

As shown in figure 1, there is a long horizontal lever on the ground, and on its intermediate point
there are two objects A and B with the same rest mass ( 0 m ) and the same speed v move
towards the left and right ends of the lever respectively at the same time.
The observer at rest on the ground will find that both A and B objects’ mass will increase to M .The distance from them to the intermediate point of the lever are equal at any one time, so the
lever always maintains a balance.
However, as seen from another observer in an inertial system moving from left to right in a
uniform rectilinear motion with the velocity v , B is at rest and A is in motion, so A’s mass is
heavier than B’s.

If the observer is in an inertial frame that perceives B to be at rest, that same observer should perceive the lever's fulcrum to be moving in the same direction as A, at half the speed A is moving at.

The propagation delay should make the fulcrum always appear closer than it really is by a smaller amount than it makes A seem closer than it is. (So the fulcrum appears to be located further away than the halfway point between A and B, closer to A than B) I'm really curious to start running the math and see if this effect is sufficient to cancel the difference in their expected masses or not.